Northern Light

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
May 20, 2007
Messages
35,565
Reaction score
103,665
This new to the AIC proposal covers multiple low-rise rental properties currently occupying 251-285 The West Mall. These properties back on the 427, and located south of Bloor and north of Dundas St West.

There is a comparable block of buildings immediately to the south of these which would presumably be the subject of similar treatment should this proposal move forward with a measure of success.

The intent is to replace these in their entirety with 3 x 13s buildings.

Replacement rental units are proposed, along with net new rental units and condo units.

Streetview:

1659689245040.png


Aerial Pic:

1659689500079.png


Site Size: ~ Just shy of 1ha/2.5 acres

* Docs are Up *

Architect is BDPQ

1659689733483.png


1659689773568.png


1659689874420.png


1659690068852.png


Comments: The site abuts multi-storey commercial to the north, like apartments (2-3s) to the south and Highway 427 to the east.

Those should make this proposal more feasible from a height perspective. It is, however, directly across from SFH with a typical 1s profile. I expect pushback.

1659690401852.png


248 parking spaces are proposed.
 
People wouldn't come without retail network. Retail needs a lot of people.
Classic chicken and egg dilemma.
It will be solved if all West Mall projects from Burnhamthorpe to Dundas are built.
Looks like Councilor Holiday is not anti-development.
Keep the fingers crossed.
 
It will be very disruptive and I'm totally sympathetic to the current residents.

We can draw some solace in the law requiring developers to replace demolished rental units.

Tenants will get new units of similar size and I believe at a similar monthly rate as their current arrangements.
 
people live here, how would you like it if your home was demolished? leave these apartments alone!
If I like the place, I certainly wouldn't want the hassle of moving out of it and finding a new place. Hopefully the developers would assist in finding new accommodations for their tenants while they rebuild, some in the city have done that… and the City will require the developer to provide you with a same-size unit at only inflation-adjusted rates when the new building is complete, and theoretically everything will be the latest technologically, etc.… although that would mean moving again. It's a hassle, but land values and demand for housing mean that landowners want to put more housing on their existing sites.

42
 
This one is the subject of an Appeals Report to the next meeting of EYCC.

It was appealed to OLT in August and the 1st CMC was actually in Nov' 23


City Planning is definitively giving this one a hard time.

From the above:

1704726270094.png

1704726294379.png

***

While I'm sympathetic w/some of the above, and question other bits............ below we see the City thinks what this really needs is a new cul-de-sac....? Seriously?

1704726393721.png


The City would also like an under-sized park of 950m2 on site. Meanwhile, there are 3 tiny stub parks opposite this development (used to block road access to West Mall) which could be enlarged by roughly the same size (2 housing lots) but by adding them to one of the stubs you would get a park 2x as large:

1704726718150.png


Sigh.
 

Back
Top